If anyone needed further proof that the Clinton’s time has come and gone, the last week has provided it in spades. Ironically, the party that suffers from terminal “Bush Derangement Syndrome” and has embraced “change” as a mantra, is considering nominating the most establishment political figure in America as their nominee in Senator Hillary Clinton. But of course, the melding of change and beltway experience plays perfectly into Clintonian triangulation, where “is” causes a debate, even if it is just about sex. How did they ever enforce Chelsea’s curfew, if she had one? In Clintonism, things are one way one day and then their opposite the next. Whatever works. Whatever wins. If Clintonism was the last thing that worked at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, it must be the next thing that will work. Right? Who said Democrats were unimaginative?

   But in the last week, it seems the Clintons are back with their old tricks. Only the delivery has become more jaded and nasty as the Democrat race has tightened. Is it me, or does Mrs. Clinton come across as a woman who can never lose an argument? In a party defined by race and gender, Hillary attempted to both celebrate the colorblind society championed by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and also gain advantage by pandering to gender. “Right has no sex and truth has no color. That is the profound message of Dr. King,” said Senator Clinton on Monday. But have you heard that I’m a woman running for president? In the debate on Monday night, poor John Edwards felt left out as a white man, as both Clinton and Obama brought his status to the attention of viewers on two occasions. Perhaps Edwards needs his own personal affirmative action program to get traction in the Democratic Party! They tell us that race and gender are not important, except when we want them to be. Strange people these Democrats. Only they can get away with racialism, due to the apparent goodwill they have somehow built up with the African-American community. This despite Democrats historically supporting the Jim Crow south for decades and largely opposing the Civil Rights Act. It took Republican Everett Dirksen in the US Senate to gain passage in 1964. But the myth of Democrats as good for blacks continues.

   Hillary Clinton can champion black causes but she is not about to lose to a particular black man if she can help it. In Monday’s debate she berated Obama for complimenting Ronald Reagan and cleverly twisted Obama’s argument, which was about Reagan’s political skills not his policy positions. She came across as a defensive and in your face candidate, something Obama has studiously avoided, even when he might have gained by being more pugnacious on the stump. Could her behavior have been a ploy to lure Obama into an “angry black man” moment, thereby blowing his gracious message of unity and his “above the fray” persona? Only she knows. So far Senator Clinton has used well the feminist trick of bullying men and then pleading the victim when the man defends himself. Obama wanted “a fight,” she said. Once in Maine a very liberal New York City woman attempted to blast John Ashcroft to me in an unprovoked tirade that came out of nowhere. After listening and saying to her that she had no idea what John Ashcroft was really like, (which was true) she shouted that I “better go home and cool off.” (Sigh). Does the electorate care that Obama has taken the high road and Senator Clinton the Clinton road? And can Obama continue to deflect her barbs as the race tightens?

   But it is former President Clinton who has come unhinged recently. Calling Senator Obama’s defense of his Iraq War position a “fairy tale” was the start in New Hampshire. (In fairness to Clinton, this was not a comment about Obama’s campaign as a whole, which the media botched for a day or two). He then accused the Obama campaign of messing with the Nevada caucuses. He then proceeded to fall asleep in church. No wonder. The man has been keeping a breakneck schedule defending his wife, no doubt payable in frequent flier miles to far-off destinations during her first term. As much as he loves campaigning, the guy deserves a rest. I propose we give him a long one. But only Democrats can.

   Congressman James Clyburn of South Carolina has called upon the former president to “cool it.” Former Senator Tom Daschle, who has endorsed Obama, said Tuesday about Clinton’s behavior, “I think it destroys the party, it will divide us and will have a huge effect down the road if it doesn’t end soon.” What is clear is that the Clintons will not go away until they are sent away by their own party. That time is now.

   Voters and media have asked Senator Clinton countless times what role her husband will play in her administration. She has refused to answer except in generalities. Her protestation that Bill supports her the same way Edwards’ and Obama’s wives support them is not credible. (That’s not the ex-president, that’s my husband) The American people deserve an answer and are not getting it. So far the role Bill is playing is the same one she played for him in the Lewinsky matter, “bad cop.” If Hillary loses, will it be blamed on the trusty “vast right-wing conspiracy?” By the way, her explanations of Bill’s affair with Monica and how she coped with it was conducted on “The Tyra Banks Show,” this week a venue where she would never be challenged about her lies about what she knew and when she knew it. Clinton fatigue has also set in with the recent fund-raising scandals, Norman Tsu and Chinatown, items the media has conveniently ignored in its rush to enthrone Hillary.

   A friend of mine told the story of his grandfather, who in his later years placed an alarm clock in the living room when company came over. At 9pm sharp the alarm clock went off, the man stood up and announced to the assembled group. “It’s time for you to go.” We need to hire this guy to usher the Clintons to the door. It’s 9pm and the Clintons have outstayed their welcome as heads of the Democratic Party.

   To be serious, the Democrats face a huge dilemma this election year, made worse by the reality that Hillary Clinton is despised by a large number of Americans: Republicans, Independents even up to 20% of Democrats. The truth is that Barack Obama has a much better shot at the presidency and Democrats know it. The worst of it is this: If Democrats turn away Obama, they are rejecting the change they say they believe in and voting for the same old Clintons. The country was tired of them in 2001. Their own party told us so. To bring them back now shows a remarkable lack of imagination and foresight. The good news is: perhaps we are destined to have a Republican president after all.

John Pendleton